Sustainability studies in orthopaedic surgery: The carbon footprint of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction depends on graft choice.

PURPOSE: Environmental sustainability in medicine is a growing concern. Determining the carbon footprint of medical procedures may aid in selecting a less impactful technique moving forward. The purpose of this study was to understand the environmental impact of different anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction techniques, for which there is no consensus in terms of optimal graft. METHODS: A life cycle analysis of different anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction techniques was performed. These included quadrupled semitendinosus graft, bone-patellar tendon-bone graft, iliotibial band augmented with gracilis graft, doubled semitendinosus and doubled gracilis graft, and quadriceps tendon graft. All procedures were systematically paired with a lateral extra-articular procedure. The study was conducted in a specialised centre using surgeon preference cards, with the help of a dedicated organisation for calculation according to the ISO 14044 standard. The primary outcome measure was the carbon footprint of each of the five techniques. Secondary outcomes included other environmental impact indicators, including human carcinogenic toxicity and mineral resource scarcity, among others, based on the ReCiPe 2016 midpoint guideline. The analysis had three scopes, each encompassing varying numbers of processes: graft implantation, full procedure, and entire environmental impact, from medical prescription to patient discharge. Results were reported as percentage increases compared to the graft technique with the lowest environmental impact. RESULTS: It was demonstrated that the surgical procedure itself accounted for <40% of the life cycle, with arthroscopy being 88% of surgery's GHG emissions, and scrubbing and draping contributing 39% to the carbon footprint. The iliotibial band augmented with gracilis tendon technique had the lowest carbon footprint (0.199 Kg Co2 eq), and the least impact in most categories at all scopes of the life cycle analysis. Using this technique as a reference, in terms of graft implantation, it was determined that extensor mechanism grafts had the highest carbon footprint (300% higher than the reference). Greater scopes showed a similar trend, with percentage differences decreasing significantly, reaching 1-3% when considering the entire environmental impact for most categories. Nevertheless, among the aforementioned factors of the ReCiPe 2016 guidelines, the semitendinosus graft paried with a lateral extra-articular procedure displayed greater difference in human carcinogenic toxicity and mineral resource scarcity (6% and 10% respectively) compared to the reference. The individual processes with the highest impact were also highlighted. CONCLUSIONS: In the institution where the study was conducted, the studied iliotibial band graft option was found to have the lowest environmental impact. Such analyses of standardised procedures can be replicated in individual institutions in order to determine their environmental impact. Identification of procedures with comparable results and differing environmental consequences may influence the future decision-making process. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, prospective cohort study.

A new self-assessment tool following shoulder stabilization surgery, the auto-Walch and auto-Rowe questionnaires.

PURPOSE: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMS) are increasingly used for patient evaluation, as well as for scientific research. Few are used for practical purposes in the clinical setting, and few are reliable enough to allow proper feedback to physicians. Two of the most commonly used assessment tools in shoulder instability are the Walch-Duplay and the Rowe scores. The aim of this study was to evaluate the validity of self-administered versions of the Walch-Duplay and Rowe scores following shoulder stabilization procedure. METHODS: Between the months of May and December 2021, all patients who were followed in one of six institutions for shoulder instability were included. Patients were required to anonymously fill a self-administered version of Walch-Duplay and Rowe score. The classic scores were measured by the surgeon. Correlations between self-assessment and physician-assessment were then recorded. RESULTS: A total of 106 patients were evaluated during the study period. Using the Spearman coefficient for correlation, a strong correlation (r > 0.5) was found between the results of the self-administered questionnaire and the surgeon-measured score. The difference between surgeon- and patient-administered questionnaires was non-significant. CONCLUSION: The self-administered version of the Walch-Duplay and Rowe questionnaires can reliably be used in the clinical setting for post-operative follow-up of patients undergoing shoulder stabilization procedures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II.